Special Session with Bryan Schott

Come one, come all to a beautiful show.

It's gonna be awesome.

And some other stuff did he, he, he, he,
he, he, he, he, some other musical stuff.

This is special session for the week
ending Friday, January 10th, 2025.

I'm Brian shot.

Managing editor of Utah political watch.

Oh, it's been a while since we've talked.

I hope your holidays were absolutely
fantastic this week on the show.

We have so much to talk about.

The GOP controlled legislature
gets their first chance to

take revenge on teachers and.

Pretty much anyone else who wants
to pass laws at the ballot box.

More tax cuts are on the way, but
there are some warning lights flashing.

We'll explain.

Here's a question for you.

Can you break the law
and get off scot free?

Well, if you're a top legislative
leader in Utah, you sure as hell can.

I don't know if you saw
the blockbuster story in.

ProPublica this week about a Utah
man who infiltrated the top levels

of far right militias in Utah
and the western United States.

It is an absolutely gripping story.

My guest this week is Josh Kaplan.

He is the author of The
Militia and the Mole.

We'll talk with him a little
bit later on the show.

Remember to subscribe to special
session, wherever you get your podcasts.

And if you leave a rating and review
that helps more people find the show,

you can do that at apple podcasts
or wherever you get your podcasts,

you can sign up for my newsletter
for free at Utah, political watch.

news.

If you'd like to support my work covering
Utah politics, you can become a paying

subscriber that makes more podcasts,
more articles, more journalism possible.

And I would really
appreciate your support.

All right, let's get to
this week's news roundup.

One of the big Fights to watch this
year during the upcoming legislative

session, uh, is what happens between the
Republican controlled legislature and

the Utah education association tensions
between those two groups have been

rising over the past couple of years.

Um, if you'll remember the Utah
education association opposed.

Amendment A, which would have changed
the process in Utah's constitution

for funding public education.

Right now, it says that all revenues
from income taxes and corporate taxes

can only fund public education, higher
education, and some social services.

And Amendment A, which lawmakers passed.

In the 2023 session, wanted to open
up that constitutional earmark,

allowing them to use those revenues
for other parts of the budget.

The Utah Education Association
didn't say anything.

In 2023, they voted to remain neutral.

Uh, there were supposed to be
negotiations between lawmakers and the

UEA over the language for that ballot
initiative during the 2020 forum.

Uh, session, but nothing happened.

And then after the session ended, the
UEA came out and publicly said that

they were opposing, uh, amendment a,
and that's a big deal because, uh,

if the state's largest teachers union
comes out against it, that's really

going to hurt its chances of passing.

If you will remember, uh, when the
legislature passed a school voucher

program in 2007, a, the UEA got.

behind a referendum to
put that on the ballot.

And then it lost at the ballot box.

So they wield a lot of power.

And then later on, they filed a
lawsuit against amendment a to

have it voided from the ballot.

Uh, this came right after the amendment
D, uh, was voided by the courts because

the language was misleading and that
the legislature didn't follow the

process for notifying the public.

The UEA went to court and said,
the same thing applies here.

The ballot languages.

Misleading and they didn't follow
the notification requirements.

And so the legislature backed off and they
said that they were not going to, uh, or,

or they had it pulled from the ballot.

And then also in the last year, the
UEA filed a lawsuit against, uh, Utah's

private school vouchers program known
as the Utah fits all scholarship.

They filed a lawsuit to block
that saying that it was an

unconstitutional use of public.

funding, uh, because they were
allowing parents to use it for private

education or homeschooling expenses.

Uh, and a judge heard the arguments for
that late in 2024, last month in December,

and a ruling on whether or not, uh, that.

Law is constitutional, or if, uh,
the state's motion to dismiss the

lawsuit, uh, that should be coming
any time in the next couple of weeks.

So that's why the tensions between
the Republicans in the legislature

and the UEA have been growing.

And a lot of people have been
wondering what sort of revenge the

legislature is going to take against
the UEA for opposing, uh, those two

initiatives, and we're starting to get.

some ideas.

Uh, there is a bill from representative
Jordan Tushar of South Jordan,

um, that is going to, uh, take aim
at public sector employee unions.

He didn't tell me exactly what the bill
would do, but he said it would be similar

to a bill he ran last year, HB 285.

And what that bill did is it
required, uh, public sector unions.

To take a recertification
vote every five years.

And that's could be a problem because if
the union members don't vote to recertify

the union, then the union goes away.

And another provision that was stripped
out of the bill at one point would have

required a union members who wanted their.

through payroll deduction, um, or to
pay their dues through payroll deduction

to, uh, opt into that program rather
than have it automatically done.

And that also would have had a big
impact on how the UEA operates.

Now, um, again, we don't know what this
year's bill is going to look like, but

I suspect it's going to do many of the
same things that last year's bill did.

Uh, Tushar says that his, forthcoming
bill, which hasn't been made public yet,

is not specifically targeting the UEA.

His quote was that it, uh, would
establish appropriate guardrails

on public sector unions.

Again, he says that that's not
targeting the UEA, but then he

turns around and tells me that.

That he also is not involving the UEA in
discussions about the legislation because

he said that they have some bullying
tactics and they're misleading their

members and putting out misinformation.

So you can tell that, um, uh, he and
other lawmakers are probably very irked.

with the teachers union.

Now, UEA president Natalie
Pinkney says that this bill would

absolutely be retaliation for some
of the actions that the UEA has

taken in over the past two years.

Um, and she has called this
a legislative power grab.

Here's something to pay attention to.

As this bill, uh, comes out and then
makes its way through the process, the

right wing group, Utah parents United.

And if you're from Utah, uh, you are
very familiar with this organization.

They are a parent rights group.

They're very in favor of homeschooling
and they do not like the UEA.

Uh, they were one of the driving forces
behind the private school vouchers

program, the Utah fits all scholarship.

Um, and, and they are, uh, Not happy that
the UEA is trying to get this struck down

in court because they like homeschooling.

They like school choice And
they hate public education.

And so they had a Survey that they
sent to their members an online survey.

It's not a scientific survey at all
It's a self selecting survey if you're

on their email list Then you got a copy
of the survey and if you're not well,

then you probably didn't see it Well,
they sent out this survey and there

was a whole section that is dedicated
to taking actions against the UEA.

These questions are pretty biased
against the Utah Education Association.

Um, a couple of the questions read, do
you believe the UEA represents your values

and do you believe the UEA has a negative
influence on education in the state?

And then we get into some specific
policy proposals that just so happened

to be in Tushar's bill last year.

And this is why I think that you can
expect them to be in his bill this year.

They asked in the survey, would
you support legislation that limits

special privileges for public labor
unions like the UEA, such as automatic

payroll deductions for union dues?

Well, that was in last year's bill and I'm
expecting it to be in this year's bill.

Uh, do you believe the UEA
should be required to certify

and prove their membership?

That's the recertification vote.

And if you fail that, uh, then the
union goes away and you can expect

that there would be a lot of lobbying
against that recertification vote.

Um, do you believe the UEA is transparent
enough about their membership and

operations and would you be more or
less likely to vote for a legislator

who supported reforms to UEA privileges?

I think it's fascinating that they
are referring to things that the union

does As privileges, and it gives you
a sense of what their mindset is.

So Utah parents United is
going to take this survey.

And I'm saying that in quotes, this
survey, and they're going to show it to

lawmakers and say, look at this, we have
broad public support for these policy

proposals and you need to pass them.

And look, so many people said that
they would support a lawmaker who

would take action against the UEA.

But.

It's a self selecting survey and they're
getting the results that they want.

The questions are written in such
a way that they are biased against

the UEA and they're designed to
get the results that they want.

So they're basically cooking
the books and trying to Uh, show

that there's this groundswell of
support of what they want to do.

Uh, so pay attention to that.

Once the legislature gets underway,
you'll see Utah parents United, uh,

try to present this survey as, uh, the,
as public will, as, uh, as, as the,

where the public is on these issues.

And, and that's really not the case.

It's where their membership is on
these issues and their members are

programmed to not like the UEA, not
like public education, their big

homeschool proponents in the first place.

So pay attention to that as the
session begins later this month.

Let's talk a little bit about the budget,
which is not the most exciting thing, but.

It's something you really need to
understand, uh, Utah's legislature.

You'll remember they cut more
than a billion dollars in

taxes over the last four years.

And at the end of last year,
they set aside another 165

million for future tax cuts.

But.

There could be a problem with that.

According to the Utah state tax commission
over the first five months of the fiscal

year tax revenue, income tax revenue from,
uh, individual income taxes and corporate

taxes is declining faster than lawmakers.

Projected individual income tax
revenue for the first five months of

the 24 25 fiscal year is down 3.3%.

Corporate tax collections is down 16%,
and that's a problem because lawmakers

projected that individual income taxes
would rise 2.9%, so that's more than 6%

off of projections so far this year, and
corporate taxes were predicted to fall.

Just under 4%, but they've
fallen 16 percent over the

first five months of the year.

So they're about a hundred million
dollars behind where they thought

they would be, or a hundred
million dollars behind projections.

And if those trends continue, and
that's a big point here, if those trends

continue, then the combined individual
and corporate income tax revenue could

be almost 350 million below projections.

Um, but Who knows what is going to happen.

We saw a similar phenomenon play out
over the last two years, going into the

legislative sessions in 2023 and 2024.

Uh, first part of the year, they
saw income tax and corporate tax

collections behind projections.

And then, uh, Uh, they rebounded enough
that they were able to pass tax cuts.

So, um, lawmakers that I spoke to said
that they're not too worried about this

because they've seen that same scenario
play out over the last couple of years.

But we're already talking about tax cuts.

You'll remember that governor Spencer
Cox said that he wanted to eliminate

the income tax on social security in the
state that was in his budget proposal.

Um, that might happen, but It
looks like Republicans are going

for yet another income tax cut.

We've already seen a bill filed that
will reduce Utah's income tax rate.

Right now it's at 4.

55 percent and it would drop it to 4.

45%.

percent, and that would eat up the
entire 165 million that lawmakers

have set aside for tax cuts.

Um, and then another bill that just
dropped earlier this week from Senator

Lincoln Fillmore would take the
discussion completely out of the process.

Uh, and his bill says that if revenues
are greater than forecast than what

they had forecast for the year.

Well, then tax cuts would
automatically take place according

to a complicated calculation.

And it sets up a situation where lawmakers
would have to take action to not cut taxes

rather than taking a vote to cut taxes.

And that's significant because when
they are cutting income taxes, the way

they pay for that, and I've explained
this before, is Is that is money that

comes out of future revenues that
could go to public education, higher

education, and some social services.

So that tax cut that they're crowing
about that 165 million, if they end

up dropping the income tax rate by 0.

1%, that's going to come
at the expense of money.

future money that could
go to public education.

So why not set up a system where
you don't have to vote to cut taxes?

You have to vote to not cut taxes.

And that's a much easier sell
because, um, all they can do is

say, you don't want us to cut taxes.

They don't want us to cut taxes.

We're not going to vote to not cut taxes.

The tax cut will be automatic.

Uh, the, one of the problems with
dropping the income tax rate by 0.

1 percent most of that money,
again, as I have explained before,

goes to people at the higher
end of the income scale in Utah.

Last year's income tax cut, uh, according
to several analyses showed that 60

percent of the money set aside for
that task at 60 percent of the money.

Eaten up in that tax cut, went to people
at the top 20 percent of the income scale.

And those in the top 1 percent
got 20 percent of that money.

So when they're taking money from public
schools, uh, and that's essentially the

way that this works, they are taking money
from public schools, higher education,

social services, and then that money is
going to people at the higher end of the

income scale, uh, because they're doing a
straight across the board percentage drop.

And the reason why that could be
a problem is Utah already has the

lowest per pupil education spending
nationwide census numbers that I saw

put us dead last 51st out of all 50
States and the district of Columbia.

And those are the most recent
numbers from the census.

Uh, from 2022, Utah spends about
9, 500 per student educating them.

And that's behind Idaho,
Mississippi, Alabama, Florida.

So.

A tax cut, another tax cut means that
that money cannot go to public schools.

Back to the falling tax
revenues for just a moment.

Uh, Utah has $850 million
in their education.

Rainy day fund, available for emergencies.

They've done things in the past,
uh, a lot of construction projects.

Instead of paying for
that with one time money.

They're paying for that
with ongoing money.

And, uh, that means that they can pull
that money out of those, um, construction

projects, roads, buildings, things like
that, and then put it towards holes in

the budget if they do have a shortfall.

So the sky's not falling, but it is
concerning to look at the revenues over

the first five months Of the fiscal year
and see that Utah's behind projections.

And then if you extrapolate that out,
uh, they could be 350 million short.

Um, although I think that that's
unlikely that that happens, but we

shall see, we'll get new revenue
numbers in In February that lawmakers

will use to set the budget then

just like you knew the Republican
controlled legislature was going

to retaliate against the teacher's
union over amendment a and the

lawsuit against school vouchers.

You also knew they were going to do
something about citizens initiatives

after amendment D, which was their
sneaky underhanded attempt To try

and give themselves the power in the
Utah constitution to void any citizen

led ballot initiative after that
was voided from the ballot because

of misleading language and they
didn't follow the state constitution

and notifying the public about it.

You knew they were going to do
something to make it harder for.

citizens to put an
initiative on the ballot.

And this week we got our first
look at what that's going to be.

There's a couple of bills are both
from Senator Lincoln Fillmore.

The first one says any proposed
law that's passed through a citizen

initiative has to explain how they're
going to fund it, how the people

behind it plan to fund it, whether or
not it's going to be a tax cut or if

they're going to use existing revenues.

And if they're going to use existing
revenues, then they have to specify which

programs are going to get less money,
uh, in order to pay for this new law.

That's something that they don't have
to do when they set the budget, they

go through the budget when they have
a fiscal note bill, they just decide

whether or not they can fund it.

Uh, they don't.

Talk about how they're going to take money
from another program to pay for this one,

but people who want to pass an initiative
at the ballot box, a citizen initiative

are going to have to explain that.

And again, they're going to have to talk
about whether they want to raise taxes.

And if they're going to raise taxes, what
kind of tax increase you're looking at

and how much of a tax increase there's
going to be in order to pay for that.

That's the first part of this two
pronged They've been wanting to do

this for the past couple of years,
there've been other pieces of

legislation that have been floated.

They didn't really go anywhere, but
after amendment D was knocked out by

the courts, this has more urgency now
because lawmakers are terrified that

the citizenry is going to start passing.

Uh, ballot initiatives, willy nilly,
and you'll hear them talk about

turning the state into California.

It's already insanely hard to get
a ballot initiative on the ballot.

2018 was such an anomaly when
they got three on the ballot.

They actually had four on the ballot.

There was the bill to, uh, get
rid of the caucus and convention

system for a direct primary.

But.

In state law, you can have people
take their names off of petitions,

and there was a concerted effort by
opponents of that to, uh, have people

remove their name from the positions.

And so even though they initially
qualified, uh, it failed because

enough people remove their
names from the initiative.

So this is the first part
of what they want to do.

They want they want the backers of
this initiative to to explain how

much it's going to cost and where the
money is going to come from either a

tax hike or what programs are going
to be cut in order to pay for this.

The second part is a proposed
constitutional amendment that says if a

ballot initiative Contains a tax hike.

If the backers want to pay for
it with a tax hike, which they're

going to have to determine when
they try to put it on the ballot.

If they go through all the, if they jump
through all the hoops, get the signatures

they need, convince people that, yeah,
we're gonna pay for this with a tax hike.

It's going to be a tax increase.

Um, and this is how much it's going
to cost if there is a tax increase

in one of those ballot initiatives.

This proposed constitutional amendment
would make it so that instead of a simple

majority passing that ballot initiative,
it would require 60 percent vote.

It would require a super majority.

Uh, we saw this this year in Florida
when they wanted to pass expansion of

abortion rights, expand abortion access.

Uh, it did pass.

It got a majority of the ballot
box, but it didn't get to 60%.

So it failed.

And that's what this bill does.

Proposed constitutional
amendment is doing as well.

It would set it up so that if there is
a ballot initiative that raises taxes,

it gets on the ballot, it raises taxes.

Everyone knows it raises taxes.

Well, it also needs 60 percent to pass.

So now not only will it become
even more difficult to put a

ballot initiative on the ballot,
it will become harder to pass it.

If you do manage to qualify one,
and put it in front of voters.

And so this is just the first part
of what lawmakers are trying to do

in response to their attempt to pass
Amendment D, which was their Hail Mary to

try and stop the redistricting lawsuit,
which said that they overstepped their

constitutional authority when they gutted
the The better boundaries initiative

pop prop four that was passed in 2018.

So this is the first part of it.

I suspect we'll see some other attempts
to make it harder to qualify initiatives,

but this is something that's been
cooking up there for a couple of years.

They've tried to do both of
these things with previous

legislation since at least 2023.

Uh, but those efforts were
abandoned for other priorities.

This one is probably going to be
a much higher priority because

their attempt to give them the
unfettered authority to repeal any.

voter initiative that is passed
at the ballot box failed.

They just want to make it almost
impossible to qualify one for the

ballot and then say one does qualify.

They want to make it very hard
for it to pass at the ballot box.

Here's an update on a story that
I've been following for a while.

for some time.

Senate president Seward Adams is
being let off the hook by state

election officials for essentially
violating Utah campaign finance

disclosure law for nearly a decade.

Um, as I told you before, he made
over 400, 000 in payments through

his campaign account and a couple of
political action committees that he and,

uh, only disclosed that as American.

So Utah law explicitly requires
candidates to disclose the actual

recipients of those campaign funds,
not just credit card companies.

And, um, that's what Adams has been doing
since 2014 when this law went into place.

And there's some very interesting
information about that.

I'll get to that in just a second,
but he's been doing that since 2014.

There have been numerous
complaints filed over, uh, him,

just disclosing American Express.

press.

When one of those complaints came
in, the state elections office told

him at first, Hey, this is not right.

You're violating the law.

You need to go back and fix it.

Uh, there were two emails that went
to him following a complaint in 2023

saying you need to amend your reports.

But he also got a bill from the state
elections office that says, well,

we looked into it and you're fine.

This doesn't apply to, uh,
office holders and candidates.

State law does not say that he
latched onto that explanation

and did not change his practices.

Then in the summer of 2024, there
came another complaint over him

reporting American express, which
is explicitly against state law.

And he said, well, you told
me in 2023 that I was fine.

And so the Lieutenant governor's
office said, we'll investigate it.

They took a couple of months and then
they told him, well, okay, we were wrong.

You were wrong.

You haven't been doing this
correctly, but we're not going to.

penalize you retroactively.

So I decided to reach out and say, Hey,
even though you're not going to get

penalized for this, even though they say
that they're not going to, uh, fine you

for improperly reporting these payments.

And again, it's 400, 000
worth of payments since 2014.

Uh, does he intend to go back and, uh,
Amend his reports because one would think

that the person who is the president of
the Utah Senate, one of the most powerful

people in Utah state government, who likes
to talk about transparency a lot, likes

to talk about how they are responsive to
the voters and they are very transparent

in how they do things you would, one
would think that in the interest of

transparency, you would go back And you
would fix your campaign finance reports,

even though you're not going to get fined.

Even though the Lieutenant
governor's office said, you know,

you're not going to get punished.

It's just the right thing to do.

At least that's the way that I view it.

And I, and I would hope that you would
view it as well as someone who, uh,

is one of the, again, one of those
powerful people in Utah government.

It's the right thing to
do to go back and fix it.

fix these reports.

Well, he's not going to
because he doesn't have to.

Um, now this is why I think his
flouting of the law, and let's be

clear here, Adams broke the law.

This is a very explicit part
of Utah code and he broke it.

He has broken the law.

He's not going to be punished
for it, but he broke the law.

This law, came into effect
following the John Swallow scandal.

And if you remember that he was
elected as attorney general,

he got indicted by the feds.

Uh, there were all sorts of problems
with campaign finance, uh, bribery, uh,

the legislature's own, uh, report on
the scandal said that he essentially

hung a forced sale sign outside
of the attorney general's office.

And.

After he resigned the year after he
resigned in 2014, when they came into

session, they passed a number of reforms
in response to the John Swallow scandal.

And this campaign finance bill
was one of them and Adams.

was the Senate majority whip.

When this bill passed,
what does the whip do that?

His job is to shepherd
legislation through the process.

He knew what this bill was,
or one would think that he

would know what this bill was.

And for him to claim ignorance of
the law, for him to Clutch his pearls

and say, well, you told me something.

You told me this and he
should know what the law is.

Um, and, and for him to claim he
doesn't, it just makes no sense.

It really strains credulity
when this bill that.

Created this requirement that
you just couldn't put American

Express on your disclosures.

You had to say who the ultimate payee was.

When this law was passed, it was
HB 394 during the 2014 session.

When it came up for debate, On the
Senate floor, the Senate sponsor, then

Senator John Valentine specifically
referenced this part of the bill.

He said, you can't do this anymore.

You have to say where the money is going.

Uh, so it's not like this was a secret.

It's not like this is some weird
provision that showed up in the bill.

Everybody knew it was there.

Although I guess Adams could claim
that That he didn't know what was

in the bill, because both times it
came up for a vote on the Senate

floor, he was marked as absent.

There weren't a lot of people who
were marked as absent on those days.

But he sure was, so Adams isn't going to
go back and fix it, even though, and once

again, let's be clear, he broke state law

joining me now on the program.

And I am incredibly honored
to have him as a guest.

It's Josh Kaplan.

He is a reporter for pro pub publica.

He is the author of a.

I can't even find the words
for how good this article is.

It's sensational.

It's amazing.

Incredible piece of reporting, uh, about
a, about a person from here in Utah who

infiltrated right wing militias and then
handed over thousands and thousands of

Thousands of documents, uh, to Josh and
he put it into an incredibly important

and wonderful piece of journalism.

I'll stop complimenting you at some point,
Josh, but Josh, thank you so much for

agreeing to, to chat with me about this.

Thank you so much for having me, Brian.

It's my pleasure.

It is, it is truly an incredible
piece of work as someone who has, uh,

tracked, uh, the right wing groups,
the right wing extremists here in Utah.

Um, there's a lot of stuff that
really shocked me as well, but

take us through this story.

Um, this is something you've
been, this is from like 2022.

You've been working on this.

You've been talking with this
gentleman, uh, who, uh, John Williams,

who infiltrated the Utah militia.

Take us through this story, um, explain,
you know, how you, how this re remarkable

tale, uh, came to you and how you attack
this, um, to turn it into what I think is

an incredible piece of re, re, reporting.

Uh, yeah, so, um, Towards the end of
this, this, uh, man's journey in these

groups, um, in October, 2022, he sent
me a kind of mysterious anonymous email.

Um, and he sent it to
an array of reporters.

I was the only one to respond.

And he, uh, you know, to be honest,
I wasn't expecting much at first.

I was, I was skeptical.

Um, but we spoke a handful of
times over encrypted calls.

And then he sent me this package
that contained a thumb drive with

tens of thousands of secret files
from inside these militias, including

dozens of hours of conversations
that he'd secretly recorded.

They were remarkable.

I mean, they gave this, you know, at
a time when militias had been moving

more and more of their activity
underground and keeping it out of

public view much more carefully, they
gave this incredibly candid, detailed,

inside window into the movement.

Um, and, you know, I spent a lot
of time, uh, working to carefully

authenticate these records.

But once I was positive that they were
real, it was, um, it was, uh, Kind of a

type of material I'd never seen before.

And,

and, and as I was reading this, this
article, um, it's not only informative

and not only provides an incredible
look into these groups, the, the three

percenters, the oath keepers here in Utah.

And, uh, this, this person, uh, this
John Williams, um, infiltrated them, uh,

became, um, One of them became trusted
and was brought into their inner circle.

It not only is an informative look
at these groups, but it's really

an, it's really a tense read.

It's an incredible narrative of what
he went through, trying to conceal his

identity, trying to stay, trying to keep
his intentions hidden because that's

what he set out to do, uh, was to sort
of, Shed a light on these organizations

after he became, uh, after what happened
with the attempted coup on January 6th,

that's when he decided to take these steps
and you know, I'm, I'm, I'm, there were

so many quotes that popped out of it,
but the one that really, uh, uh, got my

attention is he went to a meeting of the
oath keepers in, in Cedar city and Duke.

One of the people said, he's not the feds,
and if he is, he's doing a damn good job.

That is, that is such a great quote,
and I think it sums up a huge portion

of this article, because you could
really feel that he knew that he

was risking everything to bring
this information, to gather this

information, and then bring it to light.

Yeah, and he was, he was
undercover for years.

Um, and you know, when I first listened
to these tapes of him talking with

other militia members, um, it was like
hearing an entirely different person.

Um, And the militia guys loved that, you
know, the person he was pretending to be.

Um, and you know, his kind of, uh, his
method was really deception and lies.

Kind of self doubt about the ethics
of what he was doing sometimes.

But he, you know, he studied cult leaders
to learn how to better manipulate people.

And it, you know, in the, ultimately,
you know, he slept in the home

of the new national head of the
Oath Keepers who Lives in Utah.

Um, and snap some pictures, snap
some pictures, which were released.

We're recording this on Tuesday
morning, released online by the

online journalism group, D D D O S.

And those pictures are there.

It's it's just.

The, the risks that this person
put himself, uh, or, uh, the

risk that he took to bring this
information out is incredible.

And you, you mentioned that he, he
studied cult leaders to study their

mannerisms, see how they manipulated
people, but he also kept a journal of

the lies so he could keep track of what
he was telling these, these people,

people, I mean, he really was in deep.

Yeah, no, absolutely.

It was, um, I mean he treated it as a.

full time job, um, getting inside these.

And I mean, and ultimately with
American Patriots 3%, which if

people aren't familiar with is
one of the largest militias in the

country has been for a long time.

It's a, it's a three percenter group.

People might be more
familiar with that phrase.

Um, uh, but he became their top commander
in the state of Utah because in part

by, uh, Helping get the person who
was the top commander fired, uh, and

then, uh, you know, persuading people
to put him in his, in their place.

I, I, I think this, I think there's
two great elements to this story.

There's one, the information about
these militias, which is shocking.

And I want to get into that in just a
second, but also it's, you know, just

the narrative surrounding John Williams.

And, um, not only, uh, uh, is
the narrative compelling, but you

presented in such a compelling way.

And I'm just going to take a second
to again, praise you as a journalist.

That is not the kind of
story that I could write.

I know myself, and I could not
write that part of the story.

And I know that Um, that, and so the
way that you were able to do that,

the way that you were able to capture
what he was going through, there's

another quote where he told you, and
this is right in the beginning of

the story, he said, I, at some, some
part of me, uh, and I'm paraphrasing,

It is sympathetic to these groups.

That's why he fit in so well.

And he understood that about himself,
which is kind of scary, but just this

whole narrative, it's a very tense read as
you're going along because he knows that

he could be, you know, found out anytime
there's this, there's the scene where he's

at the, uh, the leader of the oath keepers
in Utah, he's got a bug and the guy's dog

takes it and is running around with it.

And he's looking around for
a gun in case he has to.

to shoot this man because he's
going to be found, found out.

That's breathtaking.

Yeah, no, I mean, thank you for the
incredibly kind words, but, um, I mean,

yes, and it was this, uh, this, this
other, you know, scene where he's riding

with this Oath Keeper in a car and he's,
uh, the Oath Keeper is talking about, um,

He has a hard time killing animals,
but an easier time killing humans.

And this is this ex police officer who's
had this incredibly tumultuous, uh,

and in some, you know, in many ways,
kind of dark path through, uh, the

police department over, over 23 years.

So now let's talk a little bit about the
malicious stuff, which I think is, is,

um, really alarming throughout this story.

There is a constant connection
with law enforcement.

Uh, they are either former law
enforcement or they are very close to

law enforcement, which is something that.

You know, we've known for a while
that, um, uh, that a lot of these,

a lot of these people have a law
enforcement background or law

enforcement is sympathetic to them.

Um, but to see it laid out this way in
this information that he provided you,

uh, one of the Oath Keepers leaders said
that he, he knew the sheriff really well,

which is the sheriff of Iron County.

Um, and that sheriff had an in with the
attorney general's office here in Utah.

For someone that, I mean, it's, it's
unsurprising if you follow these groups

for a while, but if this is your first
and entree into this world, that is

an absolutely shocking thing to learn
that you have these extremist groups

who are anti government, uh, anti dem,
democratic, uh, were Part of the, uh,

who's members were part of the attack
on the Capitol on January 6th, just

casually talking about, Oh yeah, I'm,
I'm very close with this local sheriff.

And he gets to the attorney
general's office here in the state.

That's, that's just so alarming.

Yeah, I mean, and one of the things
I found most, um, kind of amazing to

see in these files is, uh, and I, and
I went into more detail in this than a

story I did last year based in part on
these files and then interviews and some

files I got from other people, but, um,
was, you know, Seeing the playbook, the

militia's playbook for building those
ties and how much effort they put into it.

Um, because there's, uh, you
know, they see this as really

a critical priority for them.

Uh, you know, this is, these are
groups where one of the kind of

fundamental things they do is put
themselves in volatile situations with

guns, often in vigilante operations.

And It's seen as, you know, if the police
aren't going to actively support them,

they at least want the police to see
them as a friend and leave them alone.

Um, and so, you know, there's this group,
American Patriots 3 percent was at one

point sent sheriffs to around the country
with a list of, uh, uh, uh, spreadsheets.

I mean, to, uh, their members around the
country with a list of all the sheriffs

in their state to reach out and then mark
down which ones are and are not friendly.

And then they had this kind of business
school X S tactics for, uh, building those

relationships for pitching themselves to
high ranking police officers and sheriffs.

I mean, it's a, it's a, you know, There's
an incredible amount of work that actually

goes into, uh, building those ties.

And that to me is, is, is really,
um, uh, uh, an interesting point

to bring up just how much work
is happening behind the scenes.

Because, um, if, if you follow
these movements, you are aware

of the constitutional sheriff
and peace officers of Americas.

That's Richard Mack's
group down in Las Vegas.

Um, and these are groups that operate
out in the public, but then you've got

groups like the American Patriots, 3%,
the Oath Keepers, they're Operating

behind the scenes for years, and they
are playing such a long game, um, that

they've now infiltrated, they've now
burrowed themselves into, into the fabric

of law enforcement and in, in, in, in,
in, in communities that are sympathetic,

or they found sympathetic allies in
law enforcement, um, and, and most

people don't even know it's happening.

And when you read this, um, You know,
it, it, it certainly, it certainly

opened my eyes even more, but I
can't even imagine what someone who

this is their first look at this is
thinking when they're seeing this.

It's, it's almost, it's almost, uh,
unbelievable because of the scope.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

I mean, and another thing that I found
surprising, um, was, I mean, so law

enforcement, you know, there's active
duty police officers in these groups

who, you know, That's, uh, I think, what
exactly that means, and, uh, the scope

of it is something that's not super well
understood, and, you know, we learned,

I learned some things about that from
this, but there's also, uh, You know, a

city prosecutor in Utah who was in the,
you know, leadership of the Oath Keepers.

And there's, in other parts of the
country involved in the Oath Keepers,

there was a, uh, you know, ex Cleveland
Clinic doctor who's, uh, uh, you know,

was leading a, you know, was the CEO
of a United Health Group subsidiary.

There's, there's people in, kind
of, To me, very surpri with like a

really surprising amount of stature
with high level roles in these

organizations that um, you know, we're
at the uh, center of January 6th.

As, as, as you were going through
these files, um, as you were going

through these chat logs and I've had
just a cursory look, cause as I've

said, they were released for download
on Tuesday morning and I've pulled

some of them down and looking at them.

Um, I, I'm wondering what your reaction
was because when you think about the

goals of these groups, when you think
about, you know, what their ultimate.

Uh, uh, desires are, it's, it's
kind of a un-American, it really is.

It's sort of an authoritarian, um,
view of how America should be run.

Uh, there's white sup,
sup, sup, supremacy.

That's a part of it.

Um, was it hard for you to wrap your
head around the fact that while you

look at this as sort, while you,
while someone may look at this as

sort of anathema to the constitution,
to what America was founded on.

People who are involved in these
groups believe very deeply that

they're doing the right thing.

It's not that they are doing something
that is patriotic and they're

trying to improve the country.

I've always had a hard time trying
to wrap my head around that.

No, it's uh, I mean, it's really,
it's really, I think one of the

hardest questions for me to try to
be able to articulate when I was

starting to write through all this
was, what is, what is the goal?

What is the goal of these specific groups?

Because it's, you know, if you
study extremism, there's, there's

these neo nazi cells that really
are just trying to kill people.

And they're much smaller than
militias because not that

many people want to be in it.

Militias, their missions are very
vaguely defined, and a lot of people

in the groups disagree with each other
about what the actual purpose is.

And that's part of why, you know, that
kind of malleability of, of, you know, the

end goal, uh, what they're all standing
for, I think is why they've been able

to, uh, be more enduring than groups like
this in the past, and why they've been

able to grow to be as large as they are.

And so with this, you know, AP3.

On the one hand, you have, uh,
they're doing community service,

they're, uh, they're doing, like,
uh, just, like, rotary club esque,

uh, projects where they're, you know,
giving, uh, food to the homeless.

And then they're also debating
whether or not they should,

uh, assassinate politicians.

Um, and the, like, somehow
these groups can bridge that.

Um, in, in ways that, and so,
obviously, the more they swing to the

latter, And they're kind of always
threatening to do that at any given

time, or doing it in some cases.

Uh, and we get in really
dangerous territory.

I've, I've been aware of these
movements for a long time.

When I was a young reporter early
in my career, we had Ruby Ridge.

There was Waco.

There were the Montana for Freeman.

Um, and they were always treated, uh,
aside from, I mean, Ruby, Ruby Ridge was

an incredible trad tragedy with, with
Randy Weaver, um, and his family and Waco

was yet another Uh, incredible tragedy.

But then you also have, um, stories like
what happened with the Montana Freeman,

where it was kind of a buffoonish thing.

And then you had the takeover of
the Malour Wildlife Refuge, uh, with

Ammon Bundy, uh, and his family,
which also was kind of, uh, a

buffoonish attempt, but there was.

Tragedy involved in that as well, as you
sort of take a long look, uh, at these

movements as someone who has reported
on them extensively and done some of

the most vital reporting out there,
um, it would, would you agree with the

statement that, um, they are there?

While they're still very loosely
organized and they still have very

malleable goals, um, they're becoming
more intense in trying to achieve

what, what they think is right.

Because you're, I'm
seeing more organization.

I mean, the organization behind the
scenes in, in your story is amazing.

I'm seeing more organization.

And to me, that is a
very, very scary thing.

Yeah, no, it's a, it's a great question.

And I, I, I, You know, because so
much of this is now hidden from view.

I don't feel equipped to kind of speak.

Sure.

And, and perhaps that, that,
that, that was an unfair question.

It's a, it's a great question.

Um, but you know, with American Patriots
3%, for instance, you, you do see this,

uh, more intensity and it's increasing
radicalization, uh, like the, the,

uh, intensity of conversations about
whether or not they should commit acts

of mass political violence got to the
point where, you know, long time senior

members of the group who are not people
who are easily scared by a little bit

of tough talk quit because They're
scared about the number of high level

leaders talking about committing acts
of terrorism and so so you do see that

and there's I mean the and then the
Organizational point you've you laid out.

I mean, they certainly are
very you know They spend it,

they, they have a long game.

These aren't, you know, these aren't
ten people who go play in the woods.

With varying degrees of success, but
the ones that become the biggest are the

ones that, you know, do this the best.

They carefully lay out how
they can grow larger, get more

people, get more powerful.

And um, Whenever they decide it's
time to put those guns to use in some

way, uh, whether that's a vigilante
operation or a, you know, actual violent

act, um, they're ready to do that.

It seems like there is a, a, um, a thread
of nihilism, uh, with these groups.

And through your story, uh, John
Williams at the very end of your story.

Um, his, his, his, it seems like he's
very nihilistic outlook where he says

he's expecting these groups to either
kill him or he'll live long enough to

see the collapse of, of the U S that's
a very nihilistic way to look at life.

Um, a lot of these, a lot of these people,
I'm not saying all of them, but there are

a lot of them who think that the United
States is on the verge of collapse.

We saw that, uh, with the gentleman
who committed suicide outside of Trump

tower on new year's day in the cyber
truck, his writings, uh, Are, are

chilling where he said, you know, um,
uh, that, uh, the United States is

on the verge of collapse unless they
murdered half the country, which is,

you know, people who are not supporters
of Don, Donald Trump, that nihilism.

And, and this is just me
making an editorial comment.

I don't know if you would agree with this,
but that nihilism I think is probably

the most dangerous aspect of all of this.

If there's just that, that thread of
nihilism running through, A lot on

the far right where it doesn't matter.

So, you know what, so there, there aren't
a lot of restraints on what I would do.

Right.

I mean, I mean, another
way, I think that's a really

interesting and astute point.

And in another way, I think of, um,
looking at this is, uh, like maybe a less

psychological version, um, But a lot of
these people feel like they're out of

options to effect change in this country.

And, I mean, this is, this
is a consequence of all this

conversation about election fraud.

Is, you know, I think this is
part of why AP3 got more, uh,

shall we say radical over time.

Um, is, you know, people truly,
at the bottom of their hearts,

believe that voting doesn't work.

Um, and so, what else can we do?

If you truly believe that, you know,
that the country had been taking over

and that, um, you know, we were living in
a, in a, you know, in a banana republic,

uh, it's, it's not incomprehensible
how you'd start to think of, okay,

well, what can I do to wipe the ship?

Um, you know, it's a very, it's
a very, uh, dangerous mindset.

And I, I think we're seeing that play
out in a number of ways and, um, it's

got me worried and I think you need to,
I think everybody needs to read your

article because I don't think that people
are worrying enough, especially about

things that are happening in the shadows.

Uh, Josh Kaplan, again,
this article is such a.

massively great piece of work.

The writing is incredible.

The reporting is incredible.

I think one of the best comments
I saw on this is if this thing

is not made into a movie at some
point, what are we even doing here?

Um, so, you know, uh, hopefully that.

Happens down the line
because it is worth it.

Josh Kaplan from ProPublica.

Thank you so much for your time.

It's been an absolute honor
to, to, to chat with you.

Oh, it's an honor to be
here with you, Brian.

Thank you.

Yeah, I think the jury's out.

That's it for this week's show.

Thank you so much for listening.

Once again, a reminder, if you feel
like it, if you, Feel so inclined,

leave a rating and review of special
session, wherever you get your podcasts,

Apple podcasts, wherever that does so
much to help new people find the show.

I really appreciate that.

If there is a topic you'd like me to
tackle or a guest you'd like to hear

on the show, reach out and let me know.

You can email me or find me on
threads, blue sky, Facebook, Instagram.

TikTok while it's still around,
you can sign up for my newsletter

for free at utahpoliticalwatch.

news, or if you feel like it, you can
make more podcasts, more journalism

possible by becoming a paying
subscriber for as little as 5 a month.

That's at utahpoliticalwatch.

news.

I'd really appreciate it if you
were to take that extra step.

I know not everybody can swing a
subscription right now, but if you

can, it will allow me to continue
committing acts of journalism.

Special session with Brian Schott
is written and produced by me.

Thank you so much for listening.

We'll talk to you next week.